Me personally, I despise digital projection. It's heartless, no depth in the images, the colors are washed out, etc. Film projection still provides the best look for films, even those shot digitally. I am lucky to live in a theater that only projects 35mm and even has a 70mm projector for those rare new releases or just old classic 70mm films.

The film distribution model and movie studios are pushing 35mm out of all mainstream movie theaters, and sadly there are none showing first-run or even classic movies where I am. The one glorious exception is the Castro Theater in San Francisco, a 90 minute sojourn from me so I have to choose which ones to see there wisely. Just saw The Crowd there two days ago in 35mm and with a live wurlitzer organ performing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castro_Theatre

While I haven't done the research or done side-by-side comparisons to really judge the depth of digital versus celluloid, film is much more special to me just because of the conditions it has to go through, that it's a better archiving device than digital when it comes to preservation, and the grain makes every frame unique. The little scratches and hisses just remind me that film is a survivor over the convenience of digital.

Here's a good article about using celluloid as an archiving savior over digital: http://www.vulture.com/2014/12/perils-of-an-all-digital-movie-future.html

>>2
That sounds like my kinda theater. I get why studios are pushing for 35mm distribution to leave: it's cheaper. No benefits other than that. It's frustrating. We're almost to the point where "digital" might as well replace the term "film" when talking about motion pictures, i.e. "Hey, wanna go watch that new digital?".